edb_trace_start

Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?

Annotations indicate readOnlyHint=false and destructiveHint=false. The description states it records every instruction execution, which implies a performance impact but is not destructive. It does not disclose that the trace may overwrite previous traces or require stopping the process.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The description is extremely concise: two sentences covering purpose and behavior without any extraneous words. It is front-loaded and efficient.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

For a simple start command, the description is mostly complete. It covers the core action and behavior. Minor omissions include not mentioning the output (though an output schema exists) or that it clears previous traces.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Despite context signals indicating 0% schema description coverage, the input schema actually includes descriptions for both 'address' and 'max_size'. However, the tool description adds no additional meaning beyond what the schema already provides, failing to compensate for the claimed low coverage.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description clearly states it starts an execution trace at an address/function and records every instruction. This verb+resource combination is specific and distinguishes from sibling tools like edb_trace_stop and edb_trace_show.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

The description provides no explicit guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It implies usage in a tracing workflow but does not mention prerequisites (e.g., program must be running) or when not to use it.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.